republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Time Warner's Ugly Feud With LIN TV
Channels go dark, anti-online CEO suddenly likes online video...
01:29PM Thursday Oct 09 2008 by Karl Bode
tags: legal · Video · business · RoadRunner Cable
The LIN TV group and Time Warner have been having an ugly public battle over "retransmission consent" -- the fees cable companies pay for the right to carry local stations' broadcasts. LIN TV owns fifteen stations across a number of local markets, and the October 2 dissolution of their agreement came and went without a new deal, resulting in blackouts across the country, angry customers, over-worked technicians and a public shouting match.


"Most cable operators, like their satellite and telecommunications competitors, now understand and acknowledge that fair and equitable compensation is essential to ensure the viability of local television," said LIN TV’s President and Chief Executive Officer Vincent Sadusky in a statement back in September. "We look forward to negotiating with Time Warner so we may reach a deal with them before our contract expires." LIN wanted 20 cents per subscriber and obviously, that didn't happen.

Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt has been a pretty outspoken opponent of online video delivery, singling out major network online offerings as a particularly bad idea because it erodes the traditional advertising model. But with their relationship with LINTV on the rocks, Time Warner Cable has been ironically directing very annoyed customers (particularly sports fans) to those same offerings (see online video tutorial). Technicians we've spoken to say they're working fifteen hour days to try and keep customers happy.

"The loss of a local affiliate and one that contains the exclusive rights to the Home NFL team drove volume into the call center," says one tech. "Antenna's were purchased and distributed to customers who in many cases wanted help/advice to hook them up. Agents with no experience in hooking up antennas needed training and the wide range of TV's/ Hookups/Boxes etc meant that nearly every call was different." The coordinated distribution of stock and the new communications obstacles have proven a serious challenge, says the tech.

"We're working from our end to get them back on track," Time Warner spokesman Jeff Simmermon tells me, but like LINTV the company seems skeptical of negotiation success. "Time will tell," he says. Adding fuel to the fire, Simmermon points to claims that LINTV is censoring criticism of the company in their forums. LINTV, meanwhile, has been telling customers to get service elsewhere:
We will continue to negotiate with Time Warner. Unfortunately, we do not know if, or when, we will reach an agreement. . . There are several ways you can continue to get our programming. You can also switch to DISH and receive a $50 incentive. Their phone number is 1-888-DISH-950. AT&T’s Advanced TV and Verizon’s FiOS service are also available in several markets. AT&T’s phone number is 1-800-PICK-ATT and Verizon’s phone number is 1-888-438-3467. Don’t forget, you can always use an antenna.
This could be a broader problem at the tail end of this year, as a significant number of retransmission consent agreements are scheduled to expire before 2009.

Related:
  1. TorrentSpy Calls It Quits
  2. Verizon Advertising: Do As We Say, Not As We Do
  3. Time Warner Cable: Don't Go 'Willy Nilly' Putting Stuff Online
  4. LA Sues Time Warner Cable Over Adelphia Mess
  5. Verizon, Sprint, TWC To Block Child Porn
  6. Time Warner Cable Denies They Block Websites
  7. The Network DVR Lives!
  8. Time Warner Would Quickly Deploy Network DVR if Allowed
Forums » Time Warner's Ugly Feud With LIN TV
view: topics flat text 
Post a:
page: 1 · 2

funchords
Robb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
·Comcast

Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

(Not an argument, just a question.)

As long as the Cable TV company isn't extending the signal beyond the broadcast area, and isn't superimposing its own ads over the local station's ads, then the net effect is a wash.

Why should the local stations get anything?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
Enlightener

join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

I never try to apply common sense to our strange regulated system.

I'd think that perhaps the provider should be entitled a small fee for the infrastructure to uplink the signal to the cable/dss provider but otherwise I'd agree with you. But again, see my first comment...

miscDude



Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by Enlightener See Profile :

I'd think that perhaps the provider should be entitled a small fee for the infrastructure to uplink the signal to the cable/dss provider but otherwise I'd agree with you. But again, see my first comment...
I think there are existing processes in place for the uplink to the cable headends. Often it could be something as simple as the cable-co paying for the fiber/digital link directly to the headend in exchange for some ad-time.... or even the 2 party's splitting the costs.

The interesting thing here is how unlike with a traditional Cable network which has the set infrastructure with a SAT to beam the signal to all the providers and then factors that into their per-sub rates, the locals have a much smaller potential re-transmission area so I'm not sure how that would effect the costs.

Was LIN saying $.20 per-sub and they would pick up the fiber link costs? Or where they demanding the $.20 per-sub and TW also pay for the costs of getting the signal to the plant? Did TW counter with a lower per-sub cost and paying for that fiber link?

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable

said by Enlightener See Profile :
I'd think that perhaps the provider should be entitled a small fee for the infrastructure to uplink the signal to the cable/dss provider but otherwise I'd agree with you. But again, see my first comment...
Theres still quite a bit of actual OTA reception done to get OTA signals to crapble and DBS.

Its not all fiber, especially on crapble. I pass a BHN headend daily which is still getting all their OTA by actual OTA reception. Same with crax further south. They have quite a nice tower with an assortment of OTA, microwave and LMR.

I know Dish has spent a lot to create fiber linked uplink facilties for its wasteful local retransmission.
--
Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex.

BSD24
Premium
join:2008-04-30
Taunton, MA
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL


edit:
October 9th, @06:17PM

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by rec9140 See Profile :

said by Enlightener See Profile :
I'd think that perhaps the provider should be entitled a small fee for the infrastructure to uplink the signal to the cable/dss provider but otherwise I'd agree with you. But again, see my first comment...
Theres still quite a bit of actual OTA reception done to get OTA signals to crapble and DBS.

Its not all fiber, especially on crapble. I pass a BHN headend daily which is still getting all their OTA by actual OTA reception. Same with crax further south. They have quite a nice tower with an assortment of OTA, microwave and LMR.

I know Dish has spent a lot to create fiber linked uplink facilties for its wasteful local retransmission.
Maybe in Florida. For the Boston, MA channels - most (that I'm aware of) have Fiber links to the headend of Comcast. Thats of course given the fact that not all studios for the channels in Boston are located in Boston.

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by BSD24 See Profile :
Maybe in Florida. For the Boston, MA channels - most (that I'm aware of) have Fiber links to the headend of Comcast. Thats of course given the fact that not all studios for the channels in Boston are located in Boston.
Actually I can name several other places in OH, PA, WV that all still getting their OTA channels by actual OTA.

Dish has done a lot to get fiber feeds for its wasteful local retransmission in many areas. But in some of the lower DMA's its nothing more than antennas at the uplink site.

Fiber feeds are starting to become the norm, especially in large areas, but there is still a crap load of actual reception headends out there.

Some have consolidated their headends and feed the region by fiber, but not all.

Theres a mom & pop crable co in my area which does OTA still, and probably always will.
--
Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex.

Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by rec9140 See Profile :

Actually I can name several other places in OH, PA, WV that all still getting their OTA channels by actual OTA.
Here's a direct quote from an e-mail I rec'd regarding Time Warner's (at the time) Dayton division:

"We receive some via fiber with off air backup and others we receive off air."

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by Hall See Profile :
Here's a direct quote from an e-mail I rec'd regarding Time Warner's (at the time) Dayton division:

"We receive some via fiber with off air backup and others we receive off air."

I dont see how this contradicts what I stated?

Some areas get things on fiber, some areas area mixed, some are 100% OTA, some is for back up for fiber cuts etc. (Smart move!)

I didn't state or infer that all of OH, WV, PA was OTA.
--
Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex.

Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by rec9140 See Profile :

I dont see how this contradicts what I stated?
I don't see where I said I was disputing your comment or saying you were wrong. Here's a hint: I was backing you up !

BSD24
Premium
join:2008-04-30
Taunton, MA
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

Cable operators have more direct feeds (fiber) than any competitor, they have been delivering TV since before FIOS and UVERSE. Given this they should have more direct fiber links in total. Although this may not be the case for areas that have a cable operator that has not upgraded networks in the past.

stormbow
Premium
join:2002-07-31
Simi Valley, CA
clubs:
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by rec9140 See Profile :



Dish has done a lot to get fiber feeds for its wasteful local retransmission in many areas.
What exactly do you mean by wasteful local retransmission??

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by stormbow See Profile :
What exactly do you mean by wasteful local retransmission?? 
Wasteful:
1. given to or characterized by useless consumption or expenditure
2. grossly extravagant

Transponder space is limitd for the DBS services, even with the spot beam service that Dish uses for its wasteful LIL.

Take a look at a given period for any x affiliate for y network at say 8PM on THUR. z show is on EVERY X affiliate taking up space! 

What a waste of transponder space, resources to get that signal ie: fiber feeds, uplink etc..Why do we need 100+ of the same y network showing the same stuf??? We don't.

The networks should ditch the affiliates, go to a system similar to HBO etc.. NBC-E, NBC-W, ABC-E, ABC-W, Fox-E, Fox-W, CBS-E, CBS-W, CW-E, CW-W, My-E, My-W 12 channels v. 100's. Networks could also schedule replays of the shows just like HBO etc. does.

BUT.....
My news...
My sports...
My weather...

You can review the other posts on how you get that information in 2008, and its most certainly not OTA or LIL TV.

LIL be it Dish or direcrap is wasteful of limited resources for the DBS carriers.The ONE and ONLY way I see that this makes sense is if the rules are changed and the system to deliver them is changed.

RULES
1) You can choose to receive as many of the stations as you wish from as many areas as you want.
2) NO BLACKOUTS

System
ONE and ONLY ONE system is setup. Launch a sat that is US nationwide visible (in the 90-120 arc) and put ALL the LIL for Dish and direcrap on that system. Thus all the LIL is on one sat, doesn't detract from either DBS carriers transponder space. Make FTA compatible and let that marketplace provide LIL and Dish can get out of it.

Why this will NEVER HAPPEN.
1) NAB
2) Sports
3) Syndex

Technology has surpassed all of these and they are trying to hold onto their antiquated ways and make every one suffer along with it.
--
Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex.

GoodDog

join:2000-07-03
Goshen, NY
When the local channels suffer a loss of ratings due to lack of availabilty, they will be back talking to TWC.

Jim Gurd
Premium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
·Comcast

said by funchords See Profile :

(Not an argument, just a question.)

As long as the Cable TV company isn't extending the signal beyond the broadcast area, and isn't superimposing its own ads over the local station's ads, then the net effect is a wash.

Why should the local stations get anything?
Cable companies are actually doing the broadcasters a favor by retransmitting their signal over cable (at least with analog). They are cleaning it up and broadcasting a clear signal instead of the traditional viewing problems you get when using an over the air signal. They should actually charge the broadcasters for the service they are providing their viewers.

This will be less of an issue with digital although the signal does sometimes drop out with OTA.
--
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a crack dealer an unlicensed pharmacist.

RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by Jim Gurd See Profile :

They are cleaning it up and broadcasting a clear signal instead of the traditional viewing problems you get when using an over the air signal
You've evidently not seen what passes for analog retransmission on this system then. OTA is several orders of magnitude better PQ. And then there is ATSC...

Local television drives the bulk of cable TV viewing. Without the locals, cable is a much harder sell. The cable companies make money carrying the local TV station programming so why shouldn't they be passing a couple dimes back to the originator?
hottboiinnc
Kyle

join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

Because really like TWC Mid Ohio has done back when it was TWC Columbus is get the national programing from Fox and the others and just cut out the local programing such as the News and drop something else in its spot such as CNN or CNBC. I'm sure HSN would pay extra to have another channel for a half hour or so.

Locals just think they need more money for what? having a studio for local news? That's the only real thing they do, they don't create the actual content of TV shows.

time for LINTV to give up and go some where else. TWC won't give in, at least TWC Mid-Ohio since we're having the same battle with LINTV here.
Enlightener

join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX
I understand what you are saying for cable, but for DBS, if DirecTV uplinks out of CO, how's an OTA from Florida going to get there?

Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

If DirecTV is like Dish, they have MANY uplink facilities all over the country. I know in Dayton that the "big 4" network stations feed their signal to the local NBC station, who in turn uplinks it to Dish and DirecTV.
djweis

join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA
At least in my area the cable company does sell advertising and replaces the included commercials with ones that they have sold. I never paid attention if it was any particular channels such as "paid" ones versus local OTA channels though.

funchords
Robb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Hillsboro, OR

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

Yeah, same here. And certainly, in that case, then some money probably should change hands if it happens on the locals.

RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest

Without the explicit permission of the television station, ad substitution like what you described is illegal. Instead, you are probably seeing local slots being covered by the cable network (for those times with the local operator has no insert), and the local insertion equipment not being properly synchronized.
hottboiinnc
Kyle

join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

TWC does in this all markets along with every other cable company. they DO NOT replace all national ads. You can buy time on the local network and have your ad put in anywhere during that time the same with the national companies.

they are not doing anything illegal.

dnoyeB
Ferrous Phallus

join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI

said by funchords See Profile :

(Not an argument, just a question.)

As long as the Cable TV company isn't extending the signal beyond the broadcast area, and isn't superimposing its own ads over the local station's ads, then the net effect is a wash.

Why should the local stations get anything?
Its not a wash unless the cable company is passing on the signal at cost. Since they are profiting from it, naturally local stations (who dont adhere to FOSS model) will want their cut. Its their content after all.

For instance, if I get the 'limited basic' from Comcast, it cost me $15 and all I get is local stations, the municipality's channel, and maybe CSPAN. $0.20 per station when the cableco is charging $15 is peanuts.
--
dnoyeB
"Then said I, Wisdom [is] better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom [is] despised, and his words are not heard. " Ecclesiastes 9:16

funchords
Robb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
·Comcast

Re: Why should the locals get any money from Cable TV?

said by dnoyeB See Profile :

Its not a wash unless the cable company is passing on the signal at cost. Since they are profiting from it, naturally local stations (who dont adhere to FOSS model) will want their cut. Its their content after all.

For instance, if I get the 'limited basic' from Comcast, it cost me $15 and all I get is local stations, the municipality's channel, and maybe CSPAN. $0.20 per station when the cableco is charging $15 is peanuts.
So why would you subscribe to Comcast at all? You're not subscribing for CSPAN or the municipal channel. You might be subscribing for the better picture -- and therefore both CableCo and broadcaster benefits.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...

baineschile

join:2008-05-10
Oak Park, MI

Wow

Never thought Id see the day where a cable company cant get an agreement for local stations. I had assumed those were owned by city councils of some sort, not privately held firms that can gouge people for Survivor

Ryan Bull

@rr.com

thumbs down from:
TK Junk Mail See Profile

Crazy

Its amazing how childish Time Warner is and how they always are in the news for having problems negotiating. They always want it there way. Oh well they'll learn. I know I am a former Syracuse, NY employee and they treated us like crap too.

kamm

join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8

Re: Crazy

said by Ryan Bull :

Its amazing how childish Time Warner is and how they always are in the news for having problems negotiating. They always want it there way. Oh well they'll learn. I know I am a former Syracuse, NY employee and they treated us like crap too.
Well, it's a CRAP COMPANY, what do you expect?

And its bigheaded, arrogant-retarded CEO thinks they are in a "very good position" now that they are on their own...

...ROFLMAO, can't wait to see them humiliated when their BS caps will fuck up the whole business and FIOS will make them bleed to dry...
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE]
hottboiinnc
Kyle

join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
·buckeye cable

Re: Crazy

you forget though that NYC has an agreement that says TWC HAS to service every building that the landlords and such can not keep them out. they did NOT sign that with VZ. and VZ will be the next to put in caps. They're not watching for nothing. they also did not take the 20/20 FiOS off bundling as well.

but VZ will stop building FiOS soon and what they don't build out new will be sold or just left to rot.

miscDude



Must Carry rules?

So I kinda wonder how this jives with the must carry rules from the FCC?

I can't really blame the cable co for not wanting to be extorted for high retransmission rates for a local channel, especcially considering locals are usually part of a price regulated limited basic tier.

We all know how the per-sub rates for various cable channels can differ widely from one network to the next, with ESPN and other sports channels usually requiring a pretty high per-sub cost comparitively. It would be interesting to see were Lin's requested $.20 per sub compares with the traditional cable network rates.

SkellBasher
Yes Sorto, I'll take my Prozac

join:2000-10-22
North Tonawanda, NY

Re: Must Carry rules?

said by miscDude :

So I kinda wonder how this jives with the must carry rules from the FCC?
TW 'must carry' LIN's local TV stations UNLESS LIN decides not to allow TW to do so.

LIN decided that unless TW would pay per sub for their channels, they were going to pull their feeds away from TW. That is what happened.

It's an important point to clarify. LIN pulled their feeds from TW. TW did not take LIN off the air.

Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH

Re: Must Carry rules?

said by SkellBasher See Profile :

TW 'must carry' LIN's local TV stations UNLESS LIN decides not to allow TW to do so.
To further expand on that, the local stations are the ones who go the cableco and say you "must carry" our channel. If they do that, they basically accept the add'l viewers, which in turn means higher advertising income, as "payment" in lieu of any re-transmission fees. A station does NOT have to invoke the FCC's "must carry" clause. By doing so, of course, they lose, in most markets, over 50% of their potential viewers. In the end, how many of the big-4 stations didn't use the "must carry" clause in the past ? I'll bet most did !

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast

said by SkellBasher See Profile :

TW 'must carry' LIN's local TV stations UNLESS LIN decides not to allow TW to do so.

LIN decided that unless TW would pay per sub for their channels, they were going to pull their feeds away from TW. That is what happened.

It's an important point to clarify. LIN pulled their feeds from TW. TW did not take LIN off the air.
And people should learn that the biggest part of cable TV's costs are these agreements. Whenever a cable company tries to keep these costs in line, the content group tries to rev up the subscribers; petition local politicians; and complain on their stations.

It appears that many people just never recognize the fact that the only way to keep content providers from blackmailing the cable company is to occasionally call their bluff and let them pull their content off the air.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard

join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Re: Must Carry rules?

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

said by SkellBasher See Profile :

TW 'must carry' LIN's local TV stations UNLESS LIN decides not to allow TW to do so.

LIN decided that unless TW would pay per sub for their channels, they were going to pull their feeds away from TW. That is what happened.

It's an important point to clarify. LIN pulled their feeds from TW. TW did not take LIN off the air.
And people should learn that the biggest part of cable TV's costs are these agreements. Whenever a cable company tries to keep these costs in line, the content group tries to rev up the subscribers; petition local politicians; and complain on their stations.

It appears that many people just never recognize the fact that the only way to keep content providers from blackmailing the cable company is to occasionally call their bluff and let them pull their content off the air.
content makes up most of your CATV bill, if one notices that internet rates and digital phone rates stay pretty level. look at the Comcast 159.99 bundle, phone is 33, 16/2 net is 43. the TV part is 83.99(of course thats all the movie channels) when the bundle is broken down.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL

Re: Must Carry rules?

You really can't just look at the prices charged. Cable cross-subsidizes phone and Internet from video revenue since video has the least competition.
dentman42

join:2001-10-02
Columbus, OH
·AT&T Midwest

said by SkellBasher See Profile :

said by miscDude :

So I kinda wonder how this jives with the must carry rules from the FCC?
TW 'must carry' LIN's local TV stations UNLESS LIN decides not to allow TW to do so.

LIN decided that unless TW would pay per sub for their channels, they were going to pull their feeds away from TW. That is what happened.

It's an important point to clarify. LIN pulled their feeds from TW. TW did not take LIN off the air.
And in this area, WWHO 53 is running ads saying that TW dropped THEM! TW should nail them for false advertising or libel.

Funny, 53 is a lower-power station with a bad signal in Columbus. When they first went on the air (probably under different ownership), they transmitted a lot of home shopping crap and all of the local cablecos complained that they were abusing the must carry rule. Funny that with all that time relying on must-carry to have a presence on cable, they're now playing the pay-to-carry game.

I'll have to side with TW on this one.

SkellBasher
Yes Sorto, I'll take my Prozac

join:2000-10-22
North Tonawanda, NY

Stop the shouting!!

The constant shouting matching between the two has gotten old fast.

I have DirecTV, so I'm not affected, but I'm sick of hearing about it. The constant shouting matches between the two has gotten old fast. WIVB in Buffalo is still taking up over 5 minutes every news broadcast taking shots at TW, and they're inserting numerous commercial spots in regular broadcasting. It doesn't make a lot of sense; the target audience for these ads are TW customers, who aren't seeing them anyways unless they are on an antenna!

LIN is also undermining their position on the ads they are running. They're telling people in the ads that they 'need to switch to DISH'. LIN might not be getting a kickback from DISH for pushing their service, but to the casual observer it sure looks like they are.

TW isn't blameless here either, but the ads they're running on local radio are pretty nasty too.

No matter how this ends up, both companies will come away looking like crap.
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Stop the shouting!!

Time Warner should include ATSC tuners in their digital cable boxes. Think how much clout LIN and the other station groups would lose if they knew a lot of cable subscribers could just hook up an antenna to their cable box to receive local digital television.

kpfx

join:2005-10-28
Kerrville, TX
·RoadRunner Cable

Satellite Question

Isn't that how most the Satellite receivers work? I was under the impression that a satellite just receives the local stations (like LIN's) by the Over-The-Air NTSC or ATSC broadcast signal.

If by chance you lived in an area that couldn't even get that signal then you would usually have to pay an extra $5 to have access to it by the Satellite Uplink.
jester121

join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
·ViaTalk

Re: Satellite Question

Both DirecTV and Dish now broadcast a lot of local markets over the satellite signal, to the point where DTV has removed the tuner from their last 2 generations of HD DVRs. There's an external box you can get seperately if they don't carry your market's locals.

ballman

join:1999-07-31
Greenwood, IN
clubs:

Reminds me of the Comcast vs Big Ten Network war that went on here in the midwest all last year. Both sides must have spent a fortune on TV, radio, print, and outdoor advertising as it was difficult to go more than a few hours without being exposed to it.
--
What would you attempt to do if you knew you could not fail?

Frank
is chilling
Premium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
·Verizon FIOS

you think that's bad?

look at what i found at time warner's nyc site:

Time Warner Cable’s agreements with programmers to carry their services routinely expire from time to time. We are usually able to obtain renewals or extensions of such agreements, and carriage of programming services is discontinued only in rare circumstances. The following agreements with programmers are due to expire soon, and we may be required to cease carriage of one or more of these services in the near future:

Azteca America, BBC on Demand, Chinese Channel, Chinese Cinema, Encore, Encore Action, Encore Drama, Encore Love, Encore Mystery, Encore Western, Encore WAM, Fuel TV, Great American Country (GAC), Game Show Network, HITN, NBA TV, NHL Network, Oxygen on Demand, Sci Fi Channel, Showtime, Showtime Beyond, Showtime Extreme, Showtime Family, Showtime Next, Showtime ShowCase, Showtime Too, Sleuth, Starz, Starz in Black, Starz Cinema, Starz Comedy, Starz Edge, Starz Kids & Family, Supercanal, The Movie Channel, The Movie Channel Xtra, The Arabic Channel, RTVi, RAI, NGTV, TV Japan, Universal HD, and USA Network.

link here:

»www.timewarnercable.com/nynj/pro···ges.html
--
At first I thought everyone on the highway was drunk but then I realized I was driving in Florida

wifi4milez
In Need Of Garbage Pail Kids 1st Series

join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice

Re: you think that's bad?

said by Frank See Profile :

look at what i found at time warner's nyc site:

Time Warner Cable’s agreements with programmers to carry their services routinely expire from time to time. We are usually able to obtain renewals or extensions of such agreements, and carriage of programming services is discontinued only in rare circumstances. The following agreements with programmers are due to expire soon, and we may be required to cease carriage of one or more of these services in the near future:

Azteca America, BBC on Demand, Chinese Channel, Chinese Cinema, Encore, Encore Action, Encore Drama, Encore Love, Encore Mystery, Encore Western, Encore WAM, Fuel TV, Great American Country (GAC), Game Show Network, HITN, NBA TV, NHL Network, Oxygen on Demand, Sci Fi Channel, Showtime, Showtime Beyond, Showtime Extreme, Showtime Family, Showtime Next, Showtime ShowCase, Showtime Too, Sleuth, Starz, Starz in Black, Starz Cinema, Starz Comedy, Starz Edge, Starz Kids & Family, Supercanal, The Movie Channel, The Movie Channel Xtra, The Arabic Channel, RTVi, RAI, NGTV, TV Japan, Universal HD, and USA Network.

link here:

»www.timewarnercable.com/nynj/pro···ges.html
Hmmm, Showtime is a premium channel that TWC charges me extra for. If they drop Showtime does that mean they will bill me less?
--
If history teaches us anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly.
-Ronald Reagan-

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME

»www.timewarnercable.com/socal/pr···rts.html

No different than SoCal

The following agreements with programmers are due to expire soon, and we may be required to cease carriage of one or more of these services in the near future:



Starz, Encore, MBC (Korean), Lifeskool On Demand, Sleuth, Universal HD, USA Network, GMA Pinoy, Sci-Fi, Flix, GSN, Showtime, The Movie Channel, Oxygen On Demand, BBC On Demand, NBC Universal On Demand, NHL Network, Great American Country, Outdoor Channel, Fuel TV, NBA TV, Cartoon Network On Demand, TBS On Demand, TNT On Demand, truTV On Demand, CNN On Demand, Turner Classic Movies On Demand, Adult Swim On Demand, KFTV, KUVI, KFTR, KMEX, KUSI, KNBC, CNBC, Comedy Central, Comedy Central On Demand, DIY On Demand, E!, Fine Living On Demand, Food Network On Demand, FSN West, FSN Primeticket, HGTV On Demand, Logo, MSNBC, MTV, MTV Hits, MTV Jams, MTV2, Nick Toons, Nickelodeon, Noggin, Palladia HD, ShopNBC, Spike TV, Style, The N, TV Land, VH1, VH1 Classic, Vh1, Soul.

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable

Time for traditional networks to ditch the affiliates

The traditional networks need to dump the OTA affiliates and just go to a national delivery via satellite just like HBO etc..

That way they can deliver NBC-E and NBC-W.

There is zero need for OTA TV broadcasting in 2008.

Those still relying on it should move to DBS if crapbles not availble. That would leave only a very small minority out who could not get DBS for technical reasons ie: trees etc..

And just to stave off the posts:

NEWS > /dev/null
SPORTS > /dev/null

All the news you need is available via DBS, same with all the sports packages. Finally the sports will be paid for by the people wanting to watch.

You really want to know whats going on in your area, get a scanner.
--
Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!//Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex.

See 7 replies to this post

miscDude



Interesting link

Here's a link I located on another forum talking about the Deal with DISH

»www.engadgethd.com/2008/03/13/di···-markets

it's from March, but it really does make you go "hmmmm" about some of the back-room motivations and dealings with this whole situation.

SkellBasher
Yes Sorto, I'll take my Prozac

join:2000-10-22
North Tonawanda, NY

Re: Interesting link

LIN also played hardball with DirecTV for their HD feeds as well. When I signed up with them, I got SD for the LIN stations, but didn't get HD until a few months ago.

There's a history on the dbstalk.com forums if you care to dig it up.

LIN is not the most fiscally stable company. They're doing everything they can to maximize revenue streams.
Qixotl

join:2002-02-08
New Milford, CT

Re: Interesting link

LIN plays hardball with everyone. Charter fought with them for years for HD rebroadcast rights and only settled when the analog rebroadcast contract came due late this summer (a week or two before the local stations were to be pulled off the cable systems). Comcast and Cox had their spats with them in recent years as well, though caved in much more quickly. I think Sinclair is the only major broadcast station owner that causes more grief for cable operators and subscribers than LIN does.

»WTNH (ABC Channel 8) in Willimantic, CT

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
·Verizon FIOS


edit:
October 9th, @02:38PM